answer a question

[Kuciwalker]

And my point is that "do things which reduce the possibility of going bankrupt" and "are required to do these things by law" are not related to each other causally.

But in a world in which they aren't required to do that, and consumers are unable/unwilling to figure out whether their insurance company might default, wouldn't they have a competitive incentive to essentially ignore their own default risk?

[KrazyHorse]

Kuci, when you talk about CVA liability you have to bear risk preferences into account. If it's a widely-held public company, shareholders can diversify away some of the risk. However, employees have non-diversifiable specific exposure to the company. The higher up they are, the more their fortunes are dependent on the company doing well.

Remember that the benefit you're talking about them taking is not particularly large. It only comes into play in the event of a catastrophe.

[Solomwi]

...I'll take the LSAT and if I get over a 170 on that, well the world should be my oyster...

About five years ago, you could be excused for believing this. It's no longer the case as a general statement. Don't chase the JD without a lot of research and realistic number crunching first.